Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[Colin Bishop]

Surprise, surprise! The new RN carriers are to be delayed.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7776695.stm Well, the Navy did say they wanted them longer but I don't think that's quite what they meant!

But it doesn't seem much like joined up Government does it? On the one hand, politicians are saying it's difficult to kick start the economy because of the practical problems in bringing capital projects forward but here we have one really big capital project ready to go and they are proposing to delay it! 

I really don't think this government knows whether it's coming or going. (preferably the latter). They just seem to be drifting about at the mercy of events rather than exerting any degree of control over them.

Colin

[gingyer]

But it doesn't seem much like joined up Government does it? On the one hand, politicians are saying it's difficult to kick start the economy because of the practical problems in bringing capital projects forward but here we have one really big capital project ready to go and they are proposing to delay it! 

From the web page colin gave us:
"The Royal Navy's two new aircraft carriers are likely to enter service a year or two later than planned, Defence Secretary John Hutton has announced.

In a statement to MPs, he added there would be no delay in construction - but work would continue at a slower pace, sustaining jobs for longer"


so the project IS going a head it starts on time in the spring the differance is the hand over date is put back 2years. this will then keep jobs secure for a further 2 years
so it will stimulate the economy longer. 

[Colin Bishop]

Don't believe it! There's only the same total amount of work involved. What are the workers going to do? A three day week? The government struck a bargain with the RN to give them the carriers at the expense of much needed destroyers - Daring programme cut by 50%. Now they are reneging on that just as they unsuccessfully attempted to sell the first two Darings to Arab States to prop up the defence budget. Nothing the government says can be believed. They will do only what seems expedient at the time.

Colin

[Garabaldy]

is it BAE who are building/designing them?   They built the type 45s & the Astute submarines....

[gingyer]

is it BAE who are building/designing them?   They built the type 45s & the Astute submarines....

BVT (BAE + VT) are building the carriers
Thales are designing them

[gingyer]

Don't believe it! There's only the same total amount of work involved. What are the workers going to do? A three day week? The government struck a bargain with the RN to give them the carriers at the expense of much needed destroyers - Daring programme cut by 50%. Now they are reneging on that just as they unsuccessfully attempted to sell the first two Darings to Arab States to prop up the defence budget. Nothing the government says can be believed. They will do only what seems expedient at the time.

Colin

Colin I don't believe everything that the government says but,  they are unloading and shaping the steel for them in glasgow now,
I have friends on the project (senior posts) who tell me what is happening before our illustrious leaders know themselves.

You bring up a good point about the Darings but think about this;
The PAAMs (aster) missiles will not be signed off as operational till 2012
they are looking at ways to upgrade them already (new CIWS, new main gun)
The first few will be inservice before the missiles are ready,
My opinion is use them, abuse them get all the faults/ issues sorted build a couple of new ones
to replace them and sell the test beds to some rich saudi prince for a super yacht

The school of thought is that they can build upgraded ones to come on line with the carriers

[Colin Bishop]

I agree you are quite right that on the original schedule the carriers would not have their "teeth". Apparently the Joint Strike Fighter is too heavy when fully fuelled and armed to get off the flight deck and that has still to be sorted out. I just get cross about the government putting a gloss on their own incompetence but I guess that is par for the course. I just hope the ships do get built eventually and not cancelled half way through construction. It's happened before.

It all reminds me a bit of the late Victorian navy when ships were interminably delayed during construction to incorporate this, that and the other so that by the time they were finally completed they were obsolete!

Colin

[gingyer]

I hear they are looking at various launching methods
and a naval Typhoon

[Colin Bishop]

I might be wrong but I think the Naval Typhoon idea is a fallback in case the Americans won't release the maintenance codes for the JSF. The RN want full control of the planes, quite rightly too.

[Bryan Young]

And don't say I never warned you! This "Government" is so anti-military that they will jump on any excuse to cut spending. Our weak kneed Joints of Staff allowed the decimation of the RN only because they had been "promised" these new carriers. They must have then been thinking that "hey-ho boys" that will mean more escorts, subs and the rest of the fleet train.....never mind that the aircraft are hardly off the drawing board yet.....even if we can afford them.
Nope. The RN has been totally and royally shafted by their own incompetence and the duplicity of a left wing "government" that lies through its teeth. The Labour Party has a bit of history on this, back in the 1960's they cancelled a couple of carriers (at the height of the so-called "cold war") and the RN never really recovered.
This further "delay" will NOT be only 2 years, it will be a minimum of 4 years as this latest announcement is on top of an earlier delay of 2 years. So, to my mind. this bunch of nincompoops have been in fact very clever. They have succeeded in only 11 years to reduce this old country from the Premier League to a Channel Islands pub team. Perhaps that was their intention. Well done, chaps. BY.

[gingyer]

I might be wrong but I think the Naval Typhoon idea is a fallback in case the Americans won't release the maintenance codes for the JSF. The RN want full control of the planes, quite rightly too.

It's not the maintenance codes it is the software codes these codes can accesss and alter the maps/routing/mission stats IN-FLIGHT.
The maintenance thing was the UK wanted to upgrade them as they saw fiit the US were not to keen on this but that has been resolved.
The US's position is that the UK want 2 carriers and the french 1 from the same design but to allow this the french need acces to all the relevant
designs and paperwork as you can see these codes are very dangerous in the wrong hands.
Now bearing in mind the falklands conflict and the issues with the exocet would you trust the french with even the possability of these codes?
I would not

And you are right the Typhoon is a fall back

[bigfella]

At least you have carriers. We have nothing like that, the best we can do is a couple of short range helicopters on a supply ship. Our Navy are taking a couple of months holiday as a cost saving initiative. So all invading forces and smugglers have been sent a Memo not to do anything until after January. What a joke.

Regards David

[gingyer]

Bryan, you have a good point there
but bearing in mind the Labour party are in complete turmoil and the 2 glasgow yards and rosyth are in labour seats with the
SNP close behind them in the poles. Only if Gordon Brown has a death wish would he cancel these as it would be him ending
any chance for labour in scotland.

[Colin Bishop]

would you trust the french with even the possability of these codes?

Bearing in mind that the French political class have only ever acted in their own interests - No!

[gingyer]

Bigfella the Oz surface fleet is pretty impresive.
I saw a spannish version of the new Hobart destroyer in glasgow
looks impressive 

[boatmadman]

Yes, Bae are to build the carriers, the mid sections in Barrow. Ironically, the local press today carried a recruitment advert for several professional disciplines to work on carrier (and other) work.

They also stated that the yard has work potentially up to 2030 and are hoping for 7 Astute class subs in total.

[Garabaldy]

There was a poster floating about my work of one of the astute submarines in a BAE workshop.  It was HUGE.

[Bowwave]

If  government/MOD  fails to deliver on the MARS{ Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability}  [ new RFA ships] project this is all the carriers will be fit for. 

Bowwave

[boatmadman]

A few weeks ago, I went to our local B&Q, as I drove into the car park, Astute was sitting on the ship lift in full view - alongside a B&Q advert!

Did I have a camera with me? did I ##**####**!!!

[Colin Bishop]

Today's editorial in the Times asks why, when the Government apparently has no problems in finding untold billions to prop up the financial system with unproven remedies, it appears to have run out of money for the two carriers.

As Bryan Young will surely agree, there must be more than a suspicion that this is a prelude to attempting to scrap the project by a government which is unwilling to face up to it's responsibilities in defending the Realm.

Colin

[gingyer]

What really  me is the fact our government can find money to
help any country but can't find anything to help our service personnel

[Bryan Young]

many moons ago I posted a series of "observations" and had doubts about the viability of these 2 carriers.
Never mind the "simple" cost of building the things...the actual basic construction is a pretty minor part of the package. But then we have the corps of "Naval Constructors" who will undoubtedly over-specify and insist on over-engineering everything in sight.
Then we have the internal "fit". If history has any relevance then just about everything that goes in will be ripped out a few times for either second thoughts or "updates". Thank goodness these guys are not in charge of a commercial production company!
Also in my earlier posts I did mention that these behemoths would need manning (and womaning (?)). Given that the average age of a carrier crew would be in the region of the late 20's to late 30's, where in the UK are we going to find 4 x at least 2000people (8'000) to man them?
I now read that the RFA building programme has been put on hold. O.K..I agree that the amphib. ships are "on-stream" and are doing a capable job, but the core function of the RFA is to support the RN with fuel, stores and ammunition. If this capability is reduced then so is the functionality of the "customer" (the RN and other navies from around the world that have reason to thank and trust the RFA).
Please, do not forget that one or two supply ships will suffice. These supply ships also need supplying by "feeder" ships. The Fleet Train" for a Capital ship and its escorts (if we have any) is pretty massive, and needs its own defence train......need I go on? I'm sure you are getting a glimmer of the disaster we are facing if this politically driven downgrade goes on. It's already beyond sustainability, so who will rescue it? I shudder. BY.

[Bowwave]

Bryan, you have a good point there
but bearing in mind the Labour party are in complete turmoil and the 2 glasgow yards and rosyth are in labour seats with the
SNP close behind them in the poles. Only if Gordon Brown has a death wish would he cancel these as it would be him ending
any chance for labour in scotland.

I agree , to much is at stake, politically  and  in marginal constituencies to abandon  CVF.
Bowwave

[gingyer]

Bryan, don't know if you noticed mate but we are taking about boats not trains
In fairness some good points raised by bryan but I was wondering
If the powers that be intend to have these vessels as stand alone units or
possibly only 1 escort unlike the US version of large battle groups?

[Colin Bishop]

There are political undercurrents here.

I think the Navy's game was to give up everything else in order to get the carriers then they could turn around and say that it's essential that such large assets should be adequately protected so we must reinstare the Daring programme.

The Government on the other hand are playing a longer game and happy to see the major warships go which leaves the carriers exposed as white elephants which can be either cancelled or sold at knockdown prices which is what has happened with several of the Type 23 destroyers. In the short term jobs are safeguarded while they are being built as a "make work" programme. (less obvious than paying people to dig holes and then fill them in). remember the Tories where quite happy to flog one or two of the then brand new Invincible class to Australia in 1981. After the Falklands war they decided that maybe they should keep them after all.

As Bryan says, to be effective you need a balanced fleet of several types of warships and the RN no longer has this. At the recent South Korean Naval Review most guest countries sent major fleet units. We sent a survey ship! When I was at the Meet Your Navy event at Portsmouth in July I got talking to the chief Officer of the RFA Largs Bay, he made it very clear that this is not just a supply vessel but essentially a quasi warship for supporting amphibious operations. I have to say that she did seem to be a very capable vessel nonetheless.

Incidentally, the crew figures for the carriers are quoted as 600 sailors plus up to 900 when the air groups are embarked.

Colin